Expert-Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students' Analysis of Primary Literature

Autor/inn/en	Nelms, April A.; Segura-Totten, Miriam
Titel	Expert-Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students' Analysis of Primary Literature
Quelle	In: CBE - Life Sciences Education, 18 (2019) 4, Artikel 56 (12 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1931-7913
DOI	10.1187/cbe.18-05-0077
Schlagwörter	Primary Sources; Undergraduate Students; College Faculty; Novices; Expertise; Journal Articles; Scientific Research; Protocol Analysis; Schemata (Cognition); Cognitive Processes; Difficulty Level; Scientific Literacy; Reading Comprehension + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Primärquelle; Fakultät; Expert appraisal; Journal article; Zeitschriftenaufsatz; Cognition; Schema; Kognition; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess; Schwierigkeitsgrad; Leseverstehen
Abstract	Student engagement in the analysis of primary scientific literature increases critical thinking, scientific literacy, data evaluation, and science process skills. However, little is known about the process by which expertise in reading scientific articles develops. For this reason, we decided to compare how faculty experts and student novices engage with a research article. We performed think-aloud interviews of biology faculty and undergraduates as they read through a scientific article. We analyzed these interviews using qualitative methods. We grounded data interpretation in cognitive load theory and the ICAP (interactive, constructive, active, and passive) framework. Our results revealed that faculty have more complex schemas than students and that they reduce cognitive load through two main mechanisms: summarizing and note-taking. Faculty also engage with articles at a higher cognitive level, described as constructive by the ICAP framework, when compared with students. More complex schemas, effectively lowering cognitive load, and deeper engagement with the text may help explain why faculty encounter fewer comprehension difficulties than students in our study. Finally, faculty analyze and evaluate data more often than students when reading the text. Findings include a discussion of successful pedagogical approaches for instructors wishing to enhance undergraduates' comprehension and analysis of research articles. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Society for Cell Biology. 8120 Woodmont Avenue Suite 750, Bethesda, MD 20814-2762. Tel: 301-347-9300; Fax: 301-347-9310; e-mail: ascbinfo@ascb.org; Website: http://www.ascb.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01